Romney Charitable Giving Has Vastly Outpaced Obama’s

[Pray_4_War]

Black people are notoriously bad tippers so this news comes as little surprise.

[andreisdaman]

Follows the pattern of, on balance, conservatives being more charitable than liberals.


Romney Charitable Giving Has Vastly Outpaced Obama’s
by KEITH KOFFLER on AUGUST 17, 2012

The Obama campaign is assailing Gov. Mitt Romney for failing to release his taxes and for paying only around a 15 percent rate, but it fails to note one of the reasons for Romney’s relatively moderate payment: He donates enormous sums of tax-deductible money to charity.

In fact, during a comparable period before Obama and Romney were running for president, Romney’s giving probably was at least ten times Obama’s as a percentage of their incomes, and possibly much more.

Romney has stated that he has long given at least 10 percent of his earnings to his Mormon church. Assuming this is true – and he’d probably have to be classified as a pathological liar if it’s not – the Romneys’ giving has dwarfed that of the Obamas, whose charitable contributions only increased in direct proportion to President Obama’s political activity.

According to an analysis of Obama’s tax returns by White House Dossier, the Obamas in the five years from 2000 to 2004 gave only in the range of 0.4 percent to 1.4 percent of their adjusted gross income to charity.

And the Obamas were hardly paupers during these years, most of which show earnings of well over $200,000. They gave less than the average for that income range, which has been estimated at close to 3 percent.

In 2005, Obama’s first year as a U.S. senator, the Obamas upped their giving to 4.7 percent of income. His income also raced up to $1.66 million owing to his celebrity-induced book sales. But the increase in giving is more likely related to Obama’s political ambitions, since on average those who make more than $1 million don’t donate much more as a percentage of their income than those making in the $200,000 range.

Even in the the years he was running for president, Obama gave less than Romney has in the past two years. The Obamas’ giving totaled 5.8 percent of income in 2007, when he made $4.1 million, and 6.5 percent of the $2.6 million he earned in 2008.

Romney’s estimated 2011 tax return shows he gave 19.2 percent of his income to charity, while his 2010 return puts his giving at 13.8 percent of his income.

Only in the past two years have the Obamas finally started giving comprable amounts, donating 14 percent of their income in 2010 and 21.8 percent in 2011.

Meanwhile, Vice President Biden has not allowed political considerations to affect his stinginess. The Bidens gave 1.5 percent of their income to charity in 2011.

http://www.whitehousedossier.com/

a non-issue...Romney vastly more wealthy..also needs to protect his of shore holdings

[Erik C]

The Clinton's took tax deductions for donating Bill's used underwear to charity. Nasty.

[Straw Man]

The Clinton's took tax deductions for donating Bill's used underwear to charity. Nasty.

sounds like you're the guy who bought them

[Erik C]

sounds like you're the guy who bought them

All of us taxpayers bought them! That, and every other phoney charity tax deduction, that the Clinton's got.

[Straw Man]

All of us taxpayers bought them! That, and every other phoney charity tax deduction, that the Clinton's got.

they have access to all the same deductions as every other wealthy person so I guess you're just as pissed an Romney, The Koch Brothers and thousands of other rich people

maybe you should stop thinking about Clintons underwear

[Dos Equis]

a non-issue...Romney vastly more wealthy..also needs to protect his of shore holdings

It's hardly a non-issue, because it's about the percentage, not the total amount. 

[andreisdaman]

It's hardly a non-issue, because it's about the percentage, not the total amount. 

what happened to you, man?....you used to be a good poster with reasonable points..now you're slowly sinking lower and lower into Soul Crusher territory....you're reaching incessantly for any little thing you can find to denigrate Obama

WAKE UP

[240 is Back]

what happened to you, man?....you used to be a good poster with reasonable points..now you're slowly sinking lower and lower into Soul Crusher territory....you're reaching incessantly for any little thing you can find to denigrate Obama

WAKE UP

The party has ostracized RINOs.   RINOs have blown the last 2 elections, and 2012 was entirely too easy to win against obama with those terrible poll numbers.  RINOs are now preparing to try to convince us that somehow, only a RINO like Jeb or Christie can win the election.  Total bunk.  But they want it that way - because Cruz' deals don't line up wth their views. 

RINOs are going to be very loud and irrational and obnoxious in the coming months.

[andreisdaman]

The party has ostracized RINOs.   RINOs have blown the last 2 elections, and 2012 was entirely too easy to win against obama with those terrible poll numbers.  RINOs are now preparing to try to convince us that somehow, only a RINO like Jeb or Christie can win the election.  Total bunk.  But they want it that way - because Cruz' deals don't line up wth their views. 

RINOs are going to be very loud and irrational and obnoxious in the coming months.

I have to admit, I did think that Obama was going to lose...or would just squeak by...but he won by a landslide.....that was amazing.....I think Cruz would be easy to beat.....I'm really going to enjoy the Republicans beating up on each other..Obama may have also won due to not having a primary challenge where he would have probably had to move more to the left than he already was.....there was nothing that the conservatives could use against him

[240 is Back]

I have to admit, I did think that Obama was going to lose...or would just squeak by...but he won by a landslide.....that was amazing.....I think Cruz would be easy to beat.....I'm really going to enjoy the Republicans beating up on each other..Obama may have also won due to not having a primary challenge where he would have probably had to move more to the left than he already was.....there was nothing that the conservatives could use against him

Well, people give obama too much credit, IMHO.

It's one of those situations where lebron's center and point guard looks like all-stars... until he leaves the team and they become entirely average lol.

Obama won handily, but most other dems may have won the same way.  The populace isn't conservative anymore.  Maybe 40 or 45% of them are... but anyone who walks around a mall or restaurant in the USA... and claims at least 50% of people they encounter seem like conservatives, is seriously delusional.  Maybe in small pockets of counttry.  Even the obama haters i know - half of them are unemployed potheads that sleep around and live the liberal lifestyle while proclaiming how much they love being a republican.  

half of the country are NOT conservatives.   Not even close.  Anyone might have beaten romney.  Cause less than 50% of the place wants the independent conservative spirit.

[Straw Man]

It's hardly a non-issue, because it's about the percentage, not the total amount. 

% is only relevant if they have similar income

If one person makes 30 million and donates 20% they have a lot more discretionary income than someone making 2 million who donates 5%

Also, Romney religion likely requires/compels him to make large donations and I wouldn't doubt for a second that Romney probably make donations to his own charities or various things that somehow benefit him and his family

This guy is a world class professional tax dodger

BTW - all that aside. It doesn't make a god damned bit of difference to me whether any candidate makes donations or not. 

[Dos Equis]

what happened to you, man?....you used to be a good poster with reasonable points..now you're slowly sinking lower and lower into Soul Crusher territory....you're reaching incessantly for any little thing you can find to denigrate Obama

WAKE UP

I created this thread three years ago. 

[240 is Back]

I created this thread three years ago. 

and cruz donating very little - yet being the best, most conservative name potentially running, tells us that donation amount or % is a personal thing, not a measure of how good a man is.

Cruz' are far richer than the obamas - and the obama probably donate more - and Cruz is 100x the man obama is.

[Dos Equis]

and cruz donating very little - yet being the best, most conservative name potentially running, tells us that donation amount or % is a personal thing, not a measure of how good a man is.

Cruz' are far richer than the obamas - and the obama probably donate more - and Cruz is 100x the man obama is.

And course nobody said anything about charitable donations making someone a good or bad person, but you liberal hacks are gonna always contort the facts. 

[240 is Back]

And course nobody said anything about charitable donations making someone a good or bad person, but you liberal hacks are gonna always contort the facts. 

Disagree.   Conservatives are better people than Liberals, I think most agree with that.

Follows the pattern of, on balance, conservatives being more charitable than liberals.

[Dos Equis]

 

[Straw Man]

so charitable giving has no bearing on whether someone is a good or bad person and certainly no bearing on whether they will be a good or bad POTUS

so from Bum's own opinion he started a totally pointless thread

[240 is Back]

so charitable giving has no bearing on whether someone is a good or bad person and certainly no bearing on whether they will be a good or bad POTUS

so from Bum's own opinion he started a totally pointless thread

UNLESS it's a liberal not donating enough.   See how that works?

[Straw Man]

UNLESS it's a liberal not donating enough.   See how that works?

I see how it works in the funhouse mirror inside Bums skull